W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: NEW: Issue #1544

From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:15:55 +0200
Message-ID: <42FB093B.4090908@w3development.de>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu wrote:

> [This e-mail has been automatically generated. The following NEW issue was added
> to Bugzilla earlier today.]
> 
>   "onactivate" is Microsoft-only event
>     -> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1544

   Your specification located here
   (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-SCRIPT-TECHS-20041119/) advocates
   using a non W3C standard event named "onactivate".  This is an
   Microsoft only event and should not be promoted as part of a WC3
   specification document candidate.


Matt May's comment:
   The submitter is wrong. DOMActivate is a DOM Level 2 event:

   http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-Events/events.html

   Still, whether there is any benefit to using onactivate when UAAG
   specifies device-specific events to function in a device-independent
   fashion is a useful question to ask. It's certain to be more work for
   scripters, and the benefit to AT may be nil. Both onactivate and
   device-specific events should be tested with AT to determine the right
   technique.

My comment:
Althought there is a type of UIEvent in DOM 2 Events called DOMActivate, 
which "occurs when an element is activated, for instance, thru (sic!) a 
mouse click or a keypress", HTML or XHTML 1.x do not define an event 
handler attribute onactivate, that seems to be 'advocated' in the 
client-side ccripting techniques.
-- 
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
                             (Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2005 08:16:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:39 GMT